DFDepressed FanDepressed Fan



, all the time

Isn't PER just a per-minute measure of points and rebounds and assists and turnovers and field goal percentage, more or less? What's wrong with that? I generally find that it identifies the best players. For instance, currently his top ten is LeBron, Paul, Amare, Ginobili, Garnett, Dirk, Duncan, Bosh, Kobe... and Carl Landry. Okay, Landry's an outlier, but by all accounts he's been incredible, so I'm not that bothered by his high score.

I don't have a problem with the stat itself. My problem is that he lives and dies by it, and pretty much never references anything else. Landry's been good in his limited minutes, but if you heard Hollinger talk about him you'd believe he really is the 10th best player in the league.

It's not the only stat out there, and in a lot of cases it isn't even the best stat to use. Efficiency is important, but it isn't the be all, end all of statistics.

Tray reply to Brian on Apr 2 at 3:06

Certainly not the 10th best (and I don't think Hollinger thinks that), but maybe he's the 10th most productive/efficient player per minute? I mean, is that impossible? The guy's shooting 63%, which is obscene, and averaging 9 and 5 in 17 minutes. Multiplied out to 40 minutes that's 21 and 12 or so, which is comparable to what superstar power forwards do in their 40 minutes... I think it's a solid stat. I mean, if PER identifies Thad as an outstanding player, that says something for it right there.

awesome. Thad is only 19, too. Sometimes I forget. Henry Abbott said it best.

Thad just looks like a kid having fun out there. It's so refreshing.

Expand/Contract all comments

Leave a comment